Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
VIKRAM AGGARWAL
Cholamandalam Investment And Finance Company Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Rajender Kaur – Respondent
Key Points: - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition challenges lower court order under article 227. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. contradictory claims hinder clarity on property ownership. (Para 11 , 12 , 15 , 19) |
| 3. jurisdiction issues stemming from sarfaesi act. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 4. final directive for expeditious handling and application. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
JUDGMENT :
Vikram Aggarwal, J.
The instant petition, preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, assails the order dated 03.03.2025 (Annexure P.1) passed by the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Faridabad vide which the defence of the petitioner was struck off and the operation of notice dated 11.02.2025 regarding possession proceedings initiated qua suit house, was stayed.
2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts as emanating from the revision petition are that one Kuljeet Singh and Jasbir Kaur (since deceased), availed a loan of Rs.45,86,854/- from the petitioner and the requisite loan agreement was executed. Property bearing No. 1/727 measuring 100 square yards situated in Block-C, Raja Garden Colony, Faridabad (hereinafter referred to as 'the suit property') was mortgaged with the petitioner at the time of availing the afor
Civil court jurisdiction is barred under Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act, impacting injunctions and proceedings.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a plaintiff cannot suppress material facts to avoid a statutory bar and maintain a suit. The Court has the authority to consider circumstances....
The court established that suppression of material facts regarding a mortgage can bar a civil suit under Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the suit for injunction was not connected to the SARFAESI proceedings and did not impede the petitioner's rights under the Act.
Civil courts' jurisdiction is barred under Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act in matters that can be determined by Debt Recovery Tribunals.
Civil courts lack jurisdiction under Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act for matters within the DRT's purview, and vague fraud allegations do not suffice to maintain a civil suit.
Civil courts lack jurisdiction in matters under the SARFAESI Act, as grievances must be addressed to the DRT, per Section 34.
Application against measures to recover secured debts – Jurisdiction - Jurisdiction of Civil Court is not ousted. However, Civil Courts have to be extremely cautious while granting any interim order ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
